18 ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



been indemnity from Great Britain to the United States or indem- 

 nity from the United States to Great Britain, but merely mutual loss. 



It is to be remembered that Mr. Rush was one of the negotiators 

 of the treaty of 1818, which is said to have been, not a grant of lib- 

 erties by Great Britain to the United States, but a mere acknowledg- 

 ment of rights which had always theretofore existed. But in 1824, 

 Mr. Rush speaks of Great Britain making " good the title which the 

 United States holds under her " and if that cannot be done he asks 

 for indemnity. 



For these reasons it is submitted that the argument of the United 

 States based on an assumed partition must fail. 



EXEMPTION FROM BRITISH REGULATIONS. 



II. Even if the treaty of 1783 had been, in any sense or form, a 

 partition of the fisheries, (which His Majesty's Government has 

 already submitted is impossible either in law or in fact,) still it does 

 not follow that American citizens, exercising the treaty liberties in 

 British waters, would be free from the fishery regulations in force 

 from time to time there. The sovereignty over the shores and waters 

 affected by these liberties is in Great Britain. That has never been 

 challenged. The United States have never claimed any sort of juris- 

 diction there. 



If, therefore, American fishermen were not to be subject to British 

 regulations the position would be an impracticable one. The fisher- 

 men would be exempt from British control, but there would be no 

 other means of control available. The United States might, if they 

 so pleased, consent to the exercise of jurisdiction by Great Britain 

 but, failing that consent, there would be no means of making or 

 enforcing regulations. And this point becomes the more important 

 when it is remembered that the exemption claimed for Ameri- 

 21 can fishermen would extend to the exercise of their rights on 

 shore. His Majesty's Government submit, that the conse- 

 quences which result from the construction of the United States are 

 of themselves sufficient to show that no exemption from British regu- 

 lation can ever have been contemplated. 



Moreover, the contention of the United States comes to this, that 

 by the treaty of 1783 the Colonies were maintained in the same posi- 

 tion as before the proclamation of independence in 1776. But at 

 that time the inhabitants of the Colonies were subject to such legisla- 

 tion as Great Britain might choose to enact. Their claim now is to 

 have the same right as they had in 1783, and to have it free from the 

 control which existed then. They claim now a larger right than 

 they ever enjoyed at any time before their independence. 



